DOCSLIB.ORG

Titlul Lucrării

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Titlul Lucrării Study on Risk Analysis and the Way of Framing the Activity of Credit Guarantee for SMEs in Prudential Requirements/ Indicators Dumitru Nancu Ovidius University of Constanta, Faculty of Economic Sciences [email protected] Abstract This study deals with risk analysis and with the way of framing the activity of credit guarantee for SMEs in terms of prudential requirements/ indicators. Il also tackles the ways of framing the activity of guaranteeing, financing and treasury, under prudential requirements/ indicators, within the limits laid down for Non-Banking Financial Institutions, for Guaranteeing the Credits granted to SMEs, by the National Credit Guarantee Fund for SMEs, under the Risk Policy and internal regulations (rules, procedures, operation instructions). Key words: risk analysis, credit guarantee, SME, prudential requirements, indicators J.E.L. classification: G30 1. Introduction The aspects related to the prudential indicators on the banking market, for the fiscal year 2015, are presented in accordance with several internal regulations, such as: "Methodological Norm no. 37 on credit risk management", "Methodological Norm no. 39 on market risk management and liquidity risk", "Methodological Norm no. 19 on the classification and provisioning of guarantees", "Working Procedure no. 14 on the identification and coding of groups of borrowers" etc. Within this study, we are going to deal with risk analysis and with framing the activity of guaranteeing, financing and treasury, under prudential requirements/ indicators. It is noteworthy that, in 2015, the Fund's activity was conducted in accordance with the prudential indicators established by the Risk Policy and by the above-mentioned risk management rules (Isărescu, M., 2015, p. 7). 2. Elements connected to the way of framing the activity of credit guarantee As far as research methodology is concerned, in this paper, we used both qualitative and quantitative methods of data analysis (regarding the prudential indicators for the fiscal year 2015), such as comparative data analysis, systems analysis and descriptive analysis (Chorafas, D.N., 2007, p. 17). It is noteworthy that the data analyzed within this paper are provided by Charisma, a business intelligence software for the advanced processing and analysis of performance indicators. The main elements analyzed in connection to the way of framing the activity of credit guarantee, in terms of prudential indicators, on the banking market, for the fiscal year 2015, are as follows: 1) The balance of the guarantees granted under equity, in the amount of 2,282,911,962 RON, registered at 31.12.2015, decreased by 4.02%, compared to the balance of November 2015 (i.e. 2,378,488,000 RON). The pace of this decline was slightly higher compared to the previous month (i.e. 3.34%). In December 2015, guarantees were granted in the amount of 72,712,571 RON, registering a decrease by 29.9%, compared to the guarantees granted in November 2015, in the amount of 103,730,667 RON, while the number of the guarantees granted registered a decrease by 17.9%. 2) The exposure from the activity of credit guarantee, respectively to the clientele of financial institutions, at 31.12.2015, represented by the balance of the guarantees from the portfolio of guarantees issued from the equity, in the amount of 2,282,911,962 RON, and falls in the coverage limit of 6,718,021,866 RON, as determined by the risk policy. Also, by monitoring the funders’ use of the guarantee coverage limits based on risk classes, the exposure falls within the limits assigned to funders. Thus, the coverage limit of 6,718,021,866 RON was used in a ratio of 33.98% at 31.12.2015, considering the balance of the guarantees granted under own sources, i.e. 38.81%, if we take into account the risk exposure of 2,607,806,421 RON. 3) Regarding the quality of the portfolio of guarantees from the balance sheet, it is noteworthy that, in absolute amounts, the undervalued guarantees have decreased slightly compared to November 2015 (this decrease was triggered mainly by the decrease in the beneficiaries with payment application and in the beneficiaries with demand for payment). On the other hand, the value of the balance for insolvent debtors grew by 6.3% in December, compared to the value recorded in November 2015. Regarding the quality of the guarantees granted monthly between October and December 2015, assessed according to the credit risk categories assigned by banks, we underline the fact that approx. 98% of the grants fell in the first 3 categories (standard, in observation, substandard), the difference of about 2% of the grants classified as doubtful and loss representing extensions. 4) In terms of the exposure represented by the balance of the guarantees issued from administration sources, on 31.12.2015, the total balance of the guarantees issued from administration sources (SAPARD, EAFRD, POP, according to GEO 79/2009, Law 329/2009, GEO 20/2014 and GEO 43/2014) was 1,183,604,279 RON, decreasing by 1.85%, compared to the balance recorded in the previous month, i.e. 1,205,892,197 RON. The balance corresponding to each portfolio falls within the limits set by source categories, as presented in the report. 5) At 31.12.2015, the exposure from financing activities was of 76,600,169.49 RON (current and overdue loans, current and overdue interest, penalty interest and overdue commissions) and it was provisioned at a share of 99.55% (provisions of 76,258,053.6 RON). The exposure resulting from the guaranteeing activity, respectively to the clientele of financial institutions, reflect the framing of the exposures resulting from the guaranteeing activity at the book value cumulated at the Fund level under equity, within the maximum coverage limit (Dardac, N. and Moinescu, B., 2006, p. 45). The maximum coverage limit was set at 6,718,021,866 RON (7 times the equity of FNGCIMM). It also examines the compliance with the maximum coverage limit allocated to a funder’s clientele, depending on the risk class determined in accordance with “PL 15”. At 31.12.2015, the Fund’s exposure to risk, regarding the guarantees granted on equity, consisted of the balance of the financial guarantees registered in the book keeping plus the amount of the payment applications rejected by the Fund, the inactive guarantees that can turn into payment of guarantees if the bank appeals against the Fund's decision, and the appeal is settled favorably by the courts or by the Fund (Uyemura, D.G. and Deventa, D.R., 1993, p. 20). Thus, at 31.12.2015, the Fund’ s exposure to risk was of 2,607,806,421 RON, of which 2.282.911.962 RON represented the balance of the guarantees granted under the equity, and 324,894,459 RON represented the amount of the payment applications rejected by the Fund between 2007 and 31.12.2015, registered in Charisma database. Table no. 1a. Evolution (I) of risk exposure under the equity Rejected payment applications, Balance of the guarantees Total risk exposure Date registered in the Charisma granted under equity (RON) (RON) database (in balance) (RON) 31.10.2015 2,460,730,220 275,453,409 2,736,183,629 30.11.2015 2,378,488,000 302,165,730 2,680,653,730 31.12.2015 2,282,911,962 324,894,459 2,607,806,421 Source: Processing performed by the author, based on Charisma database The balance of the guarantees granted under equity (2,282,911,962 RON) registered at 31.12.2015, experienced a decrease by 4.02%, compared to the balance from November 2015 (2,378,488,000 RON). The pace of the decrease was slightly higher compared to the previous month (i.e. 3.34%). The situation regarding the evolution of the balance of the guarantees granted under the equity, at 31.12.2015, compared to 30.11.2015, can be explained as follows: Table no. 1b. Evolution (II) of risk exposure under the equity Balance of the Balance of the Payment New grants Balance outflow in December 2015 (RON) guarantees guarantees applications (including granted under of which: granted under under increases) in equity at Settled equity at analysis at December Total Expired/ paid off 30.11.2015 payment 31.12.2015 31.12.2015 2015 (RON) guarantees (RON) applications (RON) (RON) 2,378,488,000 18,355,643 113,931,681 27,534,698 86,396,983 2,282,911,962 189,898,690 Source: Processing performed by the author, based on Charisma database The decrease in the balance of December 2015, compared to November 2015, by 95.6 million RON, was determined by the outflows of guarantees from the balance, amounting to 113.9 million RON (of which the expired guarantees/ disclaims/ exchange influences amounted to 74 million RON; the decreases in the balances of guarantees triggered by the amortization of the loan guaranteed amounted to 8.9 million RON; the settlement of payment applications amounted to 27.5 million RON, and the extensions with a decrease in the balance amounted to 3.5 million RON, while the newly granted guarantees (without extensions) amounted to 17.2 million lei, and supplementations (extensions with an increased guarantee value) amounted to 1.2 million RON. In this regard, we emphasize the continuation of the descendant trend of the guarantees newly granted also in December, by the new guarantees amounting to 17.2 million RON, compared to the previous month, when there was registered an amount of 22.7 million RON. It is noteworthy that during January-December 2015, following the analysis on the granting of guarantees, there were rejected 347 applications for guarantees from own sources, amounting to 126.55 million RON (of which 95.38 million RON under the Coverage Convention, and 31,17 million RON under the Express Convention).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • O-SII Notification
    Notification template for Article 131 CRD – Other Systemically Important Institutions (O-SII) Please send this template to • [email protected] when notifying the ESRB; • [email protected] when notifying the ECB; • [email protected] when notifying the EBA. Emailing this template to the above-mentioned addresses constitutes an official notification, no further official letter is required. In order to facilitate the work of the notified authorities, please send the notification template in a format that allows electronically copying the information. 1. Notifying national authority 1.1 Name of the notifying National Committee for Macroprudential Oversight authority 2. Description of the measure Based on data available as of 31 March 2017, 9 credit institutions Romanian legal entities obtained a score higher than the threshold set for automatic designation of systemically important institutions (275 basis points). The re-evaluation based on June 2017 available data generated the same results. The name and LEI code of the systemically important institutions identified in Romania are provided below. Banca Comercială Română S.A. – LEI code 549300ORLU6LN5YD8X90 BRD - Groupe Societe Generale S.A. – LEI code 5493008QRHH0XCLJ4238 2.1 Concerned institution UniCredit Bank S.A. – LEI code 5493003BDYD5VPGUQS04 or group of institutions Raiffeisen Bank S.A. – LEI code 549300RFKNCOX56F8591 Banca Transilvania S.A. – LEI code 549300RG3H390KEL8896 Alpha Bank România S.A. – LEI code 529900TKT32Z5LP7XF90 CEC Bank S.A. – LEI code 2138008AVF4W7FMW8W87 Bancpost S.A. – LEI code 549300GM6AMB2XDWNC96 Garanti Bank S.A. – LEI code 549300UZRCTIM0HREY46 An O-SII buffer applicable in 2018 is set for the systemically important institutions which are Romanian legal entities.
    [Show full text]
  • Competition and Consumer Protection in the Romanian Banking Sector
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Iacovoiu, Viorela; Stancu, Adrian Article Competition and Consumer Protection in the Romanian Banking Sector Amfiteatru Economic Journal Provided in Cooperation with: The Bucharest University of Economic Studies Suggested Citation: Iacovoiu, Viorela; Stancu, Adrian (2017) : Competition and Consumer Protection in the Romanian Banking Sector, Amfiteatru Economic Journal, ISSN 2247-9104, The Bucharest University of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Vol. 19, Iss. 45, pp. 381-396 This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/169078 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ www.econstor.eu Competition's Policy – a Tool to Protect Consumer's Rights and Interests AE COMPETITION AND CONSUMER PROTECTION IN THE ROMANIAN BANKING SECTOR Viorela Iacovoiu1∗ and Adrian Stancu2 1) 2) Petroleum-Gas University of Ploieşti, Romania Please cite this article as: Article History Iacovoiu, V.
    [Show full text]
  • The Development of the Activity of Banks with Foreign Capital in Central and Eastern Europe
    Annals of the „Constantin Brâncuşi” University of Târgu Jiu, Economy Series, Issue 2/2014 THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE ACTIVITY OF BANKS WITH FOREIGN CAPITAL IN CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE RADULESCU MAGDALENA, PH.D. ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR, UNIVERSITY OF PITESTI, ROMANIA, [email protected] Abstract The privatization has as purpose to reestablish the functionality of a type of property under the public agreement. The privatization of banks brings both positive and beneficial aspects, but also some notions with a negative impact that influence the capital markets and banking system. Among the benefits we can include: the increase of the effectiveness and performance of the banking operations, the implementation of some effective structures that lead to the gradual integration of the banking system into the greatly developed economies, the improvement and perfecting of the bank services. In Romania, the privatization of banks started rather late and in some cases it turned up to be very difficult. Romanian banking system is dominated by the Austrian and Greek investors. The Romanian banking system is very concentrated, but the intermediation level is still lower than in other European or Eastern European countries. Key words: privatization, foreign investors, banking system, Romania, Eastern European Countries. JEL Classification: F21, F23, G21, G24, G32, G34. 1. Introduction Broadly speaking, the privatization had and still has as purpose to reestablish the functionality of a type of property under the public agreement, and the aim of this phenomenon was intended to remove the proven negative and unwanted aspects related to the transfer of some responsibilities from the private field to the public sphere.
    [Show full text]
  • 3.Dobanzi Depozite PF
    www.analizafinbancara.ro Dobânzi Depozite la termen în RON - Persoane fizice Martie 2021 (dobandă fixă, plătită la scadență) 1 2 3 4 6 7 9 12 18 24 36 Suma minimă / Banca Notă Interval lună luni luni luni luni luni luni luni luni luni luni Litera constituire depozit Alior Bank 1.40% - 1.75% - 2.10% - - 2.50% - 2.75% 2.80% 1.000 RON - Online A +0.10% bonus ghi șeu și Alpha Bank 1 0.50% 0.50% 1.10% - 1.30% - 1.50% 1.90% - 2.10% 2.30% încasare venit la Alpha Banca Românească 0.65% - 1.35% 1.35% 1.80% 1.80% 2.80% 2.75% 2.50% - 500 RON Banca Transilvania 0.40% - 0.50% - 1.00% - - 1.60% - 1.65% 1.85% 100 RON 500 RON Online. +0.2% BCR 2 - - 0.25% - 0.50% - - 0.80% - 1.15% - încasare venit la BCR B Banca Română de BRCI 1.50% - 2.00% - 2.60% - 2.80% 3.60% - - - 500 RON Credite si Investiţii < 50.000 RON. Peste Blom Bank France 0.30% 0.30% 0.50% - 1.00% - 1.25% 1.25% - - - 50.000 RON negociabil 150 RON. +0,05% la BRD SocGen 3 0.10% - 0.45% - 0.75% - - 1.05% - 1.25% 1.40% încasare venit 300 RON 1 -12 luni CEC Bank 4 0.95% - 1.40% - 2.60% - - 3.10% - 3.35% 3.50% Online 1000 RON 24-36 luni C Credit Agricole Bank 1.10% - 1.60% - 1.80% - 2.30% 2.50% 2.60% 2.60% - 500 RON Credit Europe Bank 5 1.25% - 1.75% - 2.25% - 2.25% 2.50% - 2.30% - 1.000 RON.Fonduri noi 500 RON: 1-12 luni Online F First Bank 0.80% - 1.35% - 1.65% - - 2.15% - 1.90% 2.00% <40.000: 24-36 luni Ghișeu G Garanti Bank 6 0.85% - 1.50% - 2.20% - - 2.55% - - - 200 RON Idea Bank 0.90% - 1.95% - 2.50% - 2.05% 2.70% 2.75% 2.75% - 500 - 50.000 RON 7 Idea Bank 1.00% - 2.00% - 2.55% - 2.10% 2.75% 2.80% 2.80% - > 50.000 RON I 1.000 RON.
    [Show full text]
  • Notification by National Committee for Macroprudential Oversight (NCMO) Romania on Recalibration of Syrb
    Template for notifying the intended use of a systemic risk buffer (SRB) Please send this template to • [email protected] when notifying the ESRB; • [email protected] when notifying the ECB; • [email protected] when notifying the EBA. Emailing this template to the above-mentioned addresses constitutes an official notification, no further official letter is required. In order to facilitate the work of the notified authorities, please send the notification template in a format that allows electronically copying the information. 1. Notifying national authority and scope of the notification 1.1 Name of the National Committee for Macroprudential Oversight (NCMO) notifying authority 1.2 Type of measure intended Periodical recalibration of an existing SyRB. (also for reviews of existing measures) 2. Description of the notified measure 2.1 Institutions covered by the The systemic risk buffer is applicable to all credit institutions Romanian legal entities. intended SRB The level of the buffer rate was already set by the NCMO Recommendation No. 9/2017 on the systemic risk buffer in Romania. The measure was notified on January 31, 2018 and was implemented starting with June 30, 2018. The vulnerabilities identified across the national financial system when the SyRB was implemented are still considered relevant: (i) the possibility of a renewed increase in non-performing loan ratios, following the rise in interest rates and the slowdown in the balance sheet clean-up process; 2.2 Buffer rate (ii) the tensions
    [Show full text]
  • The Image Management Strategy Through Social Networks
    THE IMAGE MANAGEMENT STRATEGY THROUGH SOCIAL NETWORKS. AN ANALYSIS OF THE BANKING ENVIRONMENT IN ROMANIA Victor-Alexandru Briciu1 Arabela Briciu2 Ștefania - Maria Găitan3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.31410/EMAN.2019.583 Abstract: Online self-presentation methods are becoming more and more difficult to manage today because communication technology limits user control over the information they use to strategically present themselves. By comparing older communications platforms (e.g., online chat rooms) where all the information was provided, today’s web is defined by user-generated content and allows both sides to communicate in a public environment. While self-presentation and impression management are similar concepts that are closely related, there is a consensus in the literature that impression management is a process by which individuals try to control the image that others are forming about those individuals or organizations. The size and diversity of online social networks are associated also with strategic self-representations as actions in which individuals present themselves in a way that suits the audi- ence’s expectations. Clearly, self-disclosure is an essential mechanism in developing and maintaining relationships. Therefore, the larger the size of the online social networks, the more individuals need to provide more information about themselves. The present paper aims to briefly present the ways of communication and promotion of the banks in Romania through the online environment and especially the identification and analysis of the ways in which those banks communicate and promote through the Facebook social network. To achieve the goal, a descriptive research was conducted, using the content analysis as the research method and the frequency analysis as a technique.
    [Show full text]
  • CEE Banking M&A Study 2019
    CEE banking consolidation perking up Dealmakers with agenda on both sides November 2019 Contents Foreword 1 Number of M&A deals in the CEE Region 2 CEE macroeconomic overview 4 Banking trends in CEE 5 Banking M&A dynamics in CEE 12 Digital transformation, FinTech 18 Poland 22 Czech Republic 26 Slovakia 30 Hungary 34 Romania 38 Slovenia 42 Croatia 46 Bulgaria 50 Serbia 54 Ukraine 58 Bosnia and Herzegovina 64 Albania 68 Baltic region (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania) 72 List of abbreviations 83 Disclaimer 83 Contacts 84 For more details behind the study, use the QR scenner on the last page 2 Foreword remained solid with an average over 20% therefore with no efficient economies of in the 15 countries, NPL ratios and volumes scale. The expected economic softening gravitated further to the south, while might also put more pressure on less profitability rose to historically high levels efficient banks. Consolidation seems to in several countries with an average ROE be perking up with an increasing number around 11% and no loss making banking of deals. We have seen many recent Leveraging on the success of our NPL sectors. These positive dynamics were deals from the inside, therefore we see study series which provides an overview backed by stable economic expansion with that agenda is there on both sides of the on non-performing loan markets in 15 an average real GDP growth of 3.9% in deals, and acquirers have solid financial countries across CEE and the Baltics, 2018, improving labour market conditions firepower to perform acquisitions. as a leading advisor not only in loan and intense lending activity in the region.
    [Show full text]
  • Opinions and Perceptions of Bank Managers on the Quality of Provision of Internet Banking Services
    (online) = ISSN 2285 – 3642 ISSN-L = 2285 – 3642 Journal of Economic Development, Environment and People Volume 8, Issue 3, 2019 URL: http://jedep.spiruharet.ro e-mail: [email protected] Opinions and Perceptions of Bank Managers on the Quality of Provision of Internet Banking Services Luiza Emanuela Bucur 1, Natalia Manea2, Dumitru Goldbach 3 1 Bucharest University of Economic Studies 2University POLITEHNICA of Bucharest 3Valahia University of Târgoviște Abstract. Following the accession of Romania to the European Union, the services sector has made important progress. Currently, this sector exceeds 50% of Romania's GDP. Banking has an important role in the economy by making financial intermediation, attracting deposits and placing credits. The increase in the number of banks on the Romanian market has led to intensification of competition and especially the awareness of the quality of online banking services offered. Therefore, the bank management has to take into account not only the “quality desired or achieved by the bank”, but also the quality perceived by the customer. In this paper we will start with an introduction of bank sector, and then we will present the methodology of research. The design of interview guide is the next step and in the main part of the paper is the analyses of data obtained and interpretation of results. Keywords: online banking, services quality, managers perception JEL Codes: M31, G29 How to cite: BUCUR, L., MANEA, N., & GOLDBACH, D. (2019). Opinions and Perceptions of Bank Managers on the Quality of Provisions of Internet Banking Services. Journal of Economic Development, Environment and People, 8(3), 53-59.
    [Show full text]
  • Notification by the National Committee for Macroprudential Oversight
    Notification template for Article 131 CRD – Other Systemically Important Institutions (O-SII) Please send this template to · [email protected] when notifying the ESRB; · [email protected] when notifying the ECB; · [email protected] when notifying the EBA. Emailing this template to the above-mentioned addresses constitutes an official notification, no further official letter is required. In order to facilitate the work of the notified authorities, please send the notification template in a format that allows electronically copying the information. 1. Notifying national authority 1.1 Name of the notifying National Committee for Macroprudential Oversight (NCMO) authority 2. Description of the measure The NCMO assessed the Romanian banking system from the perspective of the systemic entities based on data related to December 2019, according to the best practices recommended by EBA, i.e. the Final Peer Review Report on the peer review of the Guidelines on criteria to determine the conditions of application of Article 131(3) of Directive 2013/36/EU (CRD) in relation to the assessment of other systemically important institutions (O-SIIs) – November 2017 stating the following: “A best practice might be to use the year-end data of the year preceding the identification assessment of the systemic risk dimension, while allowing some flexibility for the use of other additional reference periods to account for structural changes to the composition of the banking system, to inform supervisory judgement or to account for year-end reference dates that may be of relevance to the jurisdiction”. No structural change of the Romanian banking system occurred since December 2019.
    [Show full text]
  • Financial Needs in the Agriculture and Agri-Food Sectors in Romania
    Financial needs in the agriculture and agri-food sectors in Romania June 2020 Financial needs in the agriculture and agri-food sectors in Romania DISCLAIMER This document has been produced with the financial assistance of the European Union. The views expressed herein can in no way be taken to reflect the official opinion of the European Union or the European Investment Bank. Sole responsibility for the views, interpretations or conclusions contained in this document lies with the authors. No representation or warranty express or implied is given and no liability or responsibility is or will be accepted by the European Commission or the European Investment Bank or by the managing authorities of European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) Programmes in relation to the accuracy or completeness of the information contained in this document and any such liability or responsibility is expressly excluded. For the avoidance of doubt, this document is provided for information only. Financial data given in this document has not been audited, the business plans examined for the selected case studies have not been checked and the financial model used for simulations has not been audited. The case studies and financial simulations are purely for theoretical and explanatory illustration purposes. The case projects can in no way be taken to reflect projects that will actually be financed using financial instruments. Neither the European Commission nor the European Investment Bank gives any undertaking to provide any additional information on this document or correct any inaccuracies contained therein. This document has been prepared with the support of a Consortium of Ecorys and Frankfurt School of Finance & Management gGmbH.
    [Show full text]
  • Notification by National Committe for Macroprudential Oversight Of
    Template for notifying the intended use of a systemic risk buffer (SRB) Please send this template to • [email protected] when notifying the ESRB; • [email protected] when notifying the ECB; • [email protected] when notifying the EBA. Emailing this template to the above-mentioned addresses constitutes an official notification, no further official letter is required. In order to facilitate the work of the notified authorities, please send the notification template in a format that allows electronically copying the information. 1. Notifying national authority and scope of the notification 1.1 Name of the National Committee for Macroprudential Oversight notifying authority 1.2 Type of measure intended Periodical recalibration of the SRB (also for reviews of existing measures) 2. Description of the notified measure 2.1 Institutions covered by the The systemic risk buffer is applicable to all credit institutions Romanian legal persons. intended SRB The vulnerabilities identified across the national financial system when the SRB was implemented are still present: (i) the possibility of a renewed increase in non-performing loan ratios, following the rise in interest rates and the slowdown in the balance sheet clean-up process; (ii) the tensions surrounding macroeconomic equilibria. The level of the systemic risk buffer is set at 0 percent, 1 percent or 2 percent, according to the 12 months average of the non-performing loans ratio and the coverage ratio with provisions 2.2 Buffer rate reported by each individual
    [Show full text]
  • Home Vs. Host Country Culture Effects on the Risk-Taking of Bank Subsidiaries
    RADBOUD UNIVERSITY Nijmegen School of Management Master Thesis Home vs. host country culture effects on the risk-taking of bank subsidiaries By DAVOR BATINA (S4481828) Supervisor: Dr. Sascha Füllbrunn Department of Economics Master: Economics (Specialization: Financial Economics) Abstract This thesis analyzes cultural effects on risk-taking among bank subsidiaries in order to answer the question whether home or host country effects are stronger. A sample of 547 banks across 61 countries is used for the purpose of this research. Culture is measured by individualism and uncertainty avoidance. The results show that both measures are positively related to risk-taking. For individualism, home country effects prevail, while for uncertainty avoidance on the other hand host country effects are the strongest. These results are partly robust when alternative measures of risk-taking are used. Table of contents 1 Introduction .................................................................................................. 4 2 Literature review and hypothesis formulation ............................................... 6 2.1 Bank risk-taking ................................................................................................................................. 6 2.2 National culture .................................................................................................................................. 7 2.3 Cultural indicators of risk-taking ...............................................................................................
    [Show full text]